Pacquiao v Froch - How long could Pac last?

what kind of bull**** logic is that? any REAL boxing fan knows the triangle effect dont work buddy

 

Harry Greb beat up middleweights when he was a welterweight, and beat heavyweights when he was a middleweight. So why couldn't Pacquiao beat Froch by decision? Greb beat guys who outweighed him by 40 pounds because he was too fast and elusive and they never hit him. Even Mike Tyson beat Frank Bruno who outweighed him by 27 pounds. Heavier does not mean better: it's usually the other way around.

 

Pac would swarm him, put him on the back foot and froch doesnt have the defense to deal with him. pac UD

 

Probably if the smaller guy is an elite and the others' a c-class to B level fighter. But a B+ to A class much bigger guy?

 

Longer than froch

 

Ridiculous thread... Froch's reach is quite long for a supermiddle. Pacquiao would not be able to close the distance without getting tagged something fierce... It's one thing to take out Clottey and Cotto, but taking on a SMW world champion? Ridiculous...

 

The analogy Haye - Valuev is not even applicable. Valuev has nothing going for him except size Froch has some skills and an ok jab...

 

Since Pacquiao is conditioned to go into someone's wheelhouse, I say not very long. Maybe two or three rounds.

 

In-out, in-out, in-out, he lasts all 12 and takes the UD on workrate.

 

Pac + Bicycle = 117-111 Ud

 

The difference is, they were Heavyweights...they are naturally very big men, not just in height either. Through history we have seen "small" (in terms of height) Heavyweights beat bigger Heavyweights, they may not be as tall, or weigh as much as there bigger opponents, but they can no doubt take a harder punch. Take a Middleweight who is as tall as a Heavyweight, put said person in the ring with a Heavyweight...could he take a full blown punch?...probably not.
Froch is a Super Middleweight...Pacquiao is just about a Welterweight, I'd even say he is naturally a 140lber now. Your example of Bruno outweighing Tyson, but Tyson still won is flawed. Froch has a huge height, weight, and reach advantage. Pacquiao has the speed, footwork and elusiveness advantage...but thats probably it. Froch would be a very intimidating opponent for Pacquiao, cutting the ring off wouldn't be easy for Froch, but Pacquiao would not have been in the ring with someone of Froch's size, so the ring would no doubt seem really small.
Like someone has mentioned, whether Froch is slow or not, Pacquiao would have to be on the run all night long. Froch could hurt him if he lands on Pacquiao with his guard up. 12 rounds is a long time to run from a very large opponent, whilst trying to build the points and rounds up.

 

Pac could last the 12 rounds just by bicycling. Pac's offense would consist of countering froch then getting the hell out before froch could reload. But all it takes is one solid shot from froch and it's lights out for Pac. But then again I wouldn't bet against Pac. This ATG never fails to surprise even his most ardent fans.

 

U guys may laugh but I think Froch skill level is so bad that I think Pac will win. Froch will find it had to touch Pac and Pac will tee off on that chin and chin check him so often that Froch will go down. Pac would get killed by other SMWs but Froch to me is that bad.

 

But did you not see that Dirrell, when in trouble, still had to take some punches from Froch? Now, Dirrell was a runner in that fight, and he did almost everything he could (legal or not) to avoid being punched hard. Just imagine if Pacquiao only had to take a third of those punches...

The kind of punches that Dirrell had to take against his guard/body/arms would hurt Pacquiao enough to allow Froch to open up some big flush shots on him.

Also, consider that Froch wouldn't have to hit Pacquiao as flush as he hit Dirrell to be effective... and that he wouldn't have to be as weary of being hit by someone like Pacquiao as by someone like Dirrell, so he could be more aggressive.

 

Where are all the Froch fans lol!